X‐ray Diffraction Characterization of the Enamel–Steel Interface

J. Rodway Mackert, Trent G. Conner, Robert D. Ringle, Edward E. Parry, Carl W. Fairhurst

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In the enameling of steel, the oxide is generally regarded as being completely dissolved by the fusing enamel, with the enamel–metal bond forming directly between oxide‐saturated glass and metal. According to this model, the adherence of the oxide layer present on the surface of the steel as the enamel begins to fuse is irrelevant, because none of the original oxide layer remains in the matured enamel–steel bond. This model has not been completely verified, however, and some researchers have presented evidence for the presence of a layer of wüstite (FeO) at the enamel–steel interface on the order of 1 to 4 μm in thickness. Whether such a layer exists has important implications regarding the mechanism of enamel–steel adherence. In the present study, a method was developed to concentrate whatever crystalline material might be present in the interfacial zone to make it more amenable to detection by X‐ray diffraction. Through the use of wüstite standards, the present technique was shown to be capable of detecting a layer of wüstite at the enamel–steel interface as thin as 0.3 μm. However, in neither one‐coat nor two‐coat enameling could a layer of wüstite be demonstrated at the enamel–steel interface. Hence, there does not appear to be a 1‐to‐4‐μm‐thick wüstite layer at the enamel–steel interface. If a layer of iron oxide is present at the interface, it must be thinner than 0.3 μm.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3087-3090
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the American Ceramic Society
Volume75
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1992

Fingerprint

Enameling
Oxides
diffraction
Enamels
Diffraction
Steel
Electric fuses
Iron oxides
enamel
oxide
Metals
Crystalline materials
Glass
steel
iron oxide
glass
metal

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ceramics and Composites
  • Materials Chemistry

Cite this

X‐ray Diffraction Characterization of the Enamel–Steel Interface. / Mackert, J. Rodway; Conner, Trent G.; Ringle, Robert D.; Parry, Edward E.; Fairhurst, Carl W.

In: Journal of the American Ceramic Society, Vol. 75, No. 11, 11.1992, p. 3087-3090.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mackert, J. Rodway ; Conner, Trent G. ; Ringle, Robert D. ; Parry, Edward E. ; Fairhurst, Carl W. / X‐ray Diffraction Characterization of the Enamel–Steel Interface. In: Journal of the American Ceramic Society. 1992 ; Vol. 75, No. 11. pp. 3087-3090.
@article{ad3d176b5cbe412d94959b63675a4f39,
title = "X‐ray Diffraction Characterization of the Enamel–Steel Interface",
abstract = "In the enameling of steel, the oxide is generally regarded as being completely dissolved by the fusing enamel, with the enamel–metal bond forming directly between oxide‐saturated glass and metal. According to this model, the adherence of the oxide layer present on the surface of the steel as the enamel begins to fuse is irrelevant, because none of the original oxide layer remains in the matured enamel–steel bond. This model has not been completely verified, however, and some researchers have presented evidence for the presence of a layer of w{\"u}stite (FeO) at the enamel–steel interface on the order of 1 to 4 μm in thickness. Whether such a layer exists has important implications regarding the mechanism of enamel–steel adherence. In the present study, a method was developed to concentrate whatever crystalline material might be present in the interfacial zone to make it more amenable to detection by X‐ray diffraction. Through the use of w{\"u}stite standards, the present technique was shown to be capable of detecting a layer of w{\"u}stite at the enamel–steel interface as thin as 0.3 μm. However, in neither one‐coat nor two‐coat enameling could a layer of w{\"u}stite be demonstrated at the enamel–steel interface. Hence, there does not appear to be a 1‐to‐4‐μm‐thick w{\"u}stite layer at the enamel–steel interface. If a layer of iron oxide is present at the interface, it must be thinner than 0.3 μm.",
author = "Mackert, {J. Rodway} and Conner, {Trent G.} and Ringle, {Robert D.} and Parry, {Edward E.} and Fairhurst, {Carl W.}",
year = "1992",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1111/j.1151-2916.1992.tb04391.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "3087--3090",
journal = "Journal of the American Ceramic Society",
issn = "0002-7820",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - X‐ray Diffraction Characterization of the Enamel–Steel Interface

AU - Mackert, J. Rodway

AU - Conner, Trent G.

AU - Ringle, Robert D.

AU - Parry, Edward E.

AU - Fairhurst, Carl W.

PY - 1992/11

Y1 - 1992/11

N2 - In the enameling of steel, the oxide is generally regarded as being completely dissolved by the fusing enamel, with the enamel–metal bond forming directly between oxide‐saturated glass and metal. According to this model, the adherence of the oxide layer present on the surface of the steel as the enamel begins to fuse is irrelevant, because none of the original oxide layer remains in the matured enamel–steel bond. This model has not been completely verified, however, and some researchers have presented evidence for the presence of a layer of wüstite (FeO) at the enamel–steel interface on the order of 1 to 4 μm in thickness. Whether such a layer exists has important implications regarding the mechanism of enamel–steel adherence. In the present study, a method was developed to concentrate whatever crystalline material might be present in the interfacial zone to make it more amenable to detection by X‐ray diffraction. Through the use of wüstite standards, the present technique was shown to be capable of detecting a layer of wüstite at the enamel–steel interface as thin as 0.3 μm. However, in neither one‐coat nor two‐coat enameling could a layer of wüstite be demonstrated at the enamel–steel interface. Hence, there does not appear to be a 1‐to‐4‐μm‐thick wüstite layer at the enamel–steel interface. If a layer of iron oxide is present at the interface, it must be thinner than 0.3 μm.

AB - In the enameling of steel, the oxide is generally regarded as being completely dissolved by the fusing enamel, with the enamel–metal bond forming directly between oxide‐saturated glass and metal. According to this model, the adherence of the oxide layer present on the surface of the steel as the enamel begins to fuse is irrelevant, because none of the original oxide layer remains in the matured enamel–steel bond. This model has not been completely verified, however, and some researchers have presented evidence for the presence of a layer of wüstite (FeO) at the enamel–steel interface on the order of 1 to 4 μm in thickness. Whether such a layer exists has important implications regarding the mechanism of enamel–steel adherence. In the present study, a method was developed to concentrate whatever crystalline material might be present in the interfacial zone to make it more amenable to detection by X‐ray diffraction. Through the use of wüstite standards, the present technique was shown to be capable of detecting a layer of wüstite at the enamel–steel interface as thin as 0.3 μm. However, in neither one‐coat nor two‐coat enameling could a layer of wüstite be demonstrated at the enamel–steel interface. Hence, there does not appear to be a 1‐to‐4‐μm‐thick wüstite layer at the enamel–steel interface. If a layer of iron oxide is present at the interface, it must be thinner than 0.3 μm.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0005768578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0005768578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1992.tb04391.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1992.tb04391.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0005768578

VL - 75

SP - 3087

EP - 3090

JO - Journal of the American Ceramic Society

JF - Journal of the American Ceramic Society

SN - 0002-7820

IS - 11

ER -